public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [Bug optimization/10221] gcc -O9 will introduce wrong asembler?
[not found] <20030326124600.10221.eoo@chess.nl>
@ 2003-06-02 1:03 ` dhazeghi@yahoo.com
2003-06-02 9:04 ` erik.oosterom@chess.nl
` (5 subsequent siblings)
6 siblings, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: dhazeghi@yahoo.com @ 2003-06-02 1:03 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
PLEASE REPLY TO gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org ONLY, *NOT* gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10221
dhazeghi@yahoo.com changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
GCC build triplet| |i686-pc-linux-gnu
GCC host triplet| |i686-pc-linux-gnu
GCC target triplet| |i686-pc-linux-gnu
------- Additional Comments From dhazeghi@yahoo.com 2003-06-02 01:03 -------
Eric,
Could you check whether your problem still occurs with gcc 3.3? There have been a number of P-
IV optimizing bugs that have been fixed. Also, please note the any optimization level above -O3 is
identical to -O3, so -O6 or -O9 will make no difference whatsoever (beyond -O3). Thanks,
Dara
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* [Bug optimization/10221] gcc -O9 will introduce wrong asembler?
[not found] <20030326124600.10221.eoo@chess.nl>
2003-06-02 1:03 ` [Bug optimization/10221] gcc -O9 will introduce wrong asembler? dhazeghi@yahoo.com
@ 2003-06-02 9:04 ` erik.oosterom@chess.nl
2003-06-24 14:37 ` erik dot oosterom at chess dot nl
` (4 subsequent siblings)
6 siblings, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: erik.oosterom@chess.nl @ 2003-06-02 9:04 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
PLEASE REPLY TO gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org ONLY, *NOT* gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10221
------- Additional Comments From erik.oosterom@chess.nl 2003-06-02 09:04 -------
Subject: Re: gcc -O9 will introduce wrong asembler?
Hi Dara,
I shall try the snapshot 20030526, (but i do have not much time), does
this include your changes?
I understand that 09 is the same as 03, but the make script did use
that.
I let you know the results.
Redgards,
Erik
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* [Bug optimization/10221] gcc -O9 will introduce wrong asembler?
[not found] <20030326124600.10221.eoo@chess.nl>
2003-06-02 1:03 ` [Bug optimization/10221] gcc -O9 will introduce wrong asembler? dhazeghi@yahoo.com
2003-06-02 9:04 ` erik.oosterom@chess.nl
@ 2003-06-24 14:37 ` erik dot oosterom at chess dot nl
2003-07-02 13:21 ` erik dot oosterom at chess dot nl
` (3 subsequent siblings)
6 siblings, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: erik dot oosterom at chess dot nl @ 2003-06-24 14:37 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
PLEASE REPLY TO gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org ONLY, *NOT* gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10221
------- Additional Comments From erik dot oosterom at chess dot nl 2003-06-24 13:27 -------
Subject: Re: gcc -O9 will introduce wrong asembler?
Next week i will have time to look at it.
Erik
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* [Bug optimization/10221] gcc -O9 will introduce wrong asembler?
[not found] <20030326124600.10221.eoo@chess.nl>
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2003-06-24 14:37 ` erik dot oosterom at chess dot nl
@ 2003-07-02 13:21 ` erik dot oosterom at chess dot nl
2003-07-05 19:40 ` dhazeghi at yahoo dot com
` (2 subsequent siblings)
6 siblings, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: erik dot oosterom at chess dot nl @ 2003-07-02 13:21 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
PLEASE REPLY TO gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org ONLY, *NOT* gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10221
------- Additional Comments From erik dot oosterom at chess dot nl 2003-07-02 13:21 -------
Subject: Re: gcc -O9 will introduce wrong asembler?
Thanks to you but the bugs seems to be solved. :)
The problem is a combination of P4 instructions and the -O3 flag.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* [Bug optimization/10221] gcc -O9 will introduce wrong asembler?
[not found] <20030326124600.10221.eoo@chess.nl>
` (3 preceding siblings ...)
2003-07-02 13:21 ` erik dot oosterom at chess dot nl
@ 2003-07-05 19:40 ` dhazeghi at yahoo dot com
2003-07-09 12:45 ` erik dot oosterom at chess dot nl
2003-07-09 14:23 ` bangerth at dealii dot org
6 siblings, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: dhazeghi at yahoo dot com @ 2003-07-05 19:40 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
PLEASE REPLY TO gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org ONLY, *NOT* gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10221
------- Additional Comments From dhazeghi at yahoo dot com 2003-07-05 19:40 -------
Just to verify: the problem no longer occurs with gcc 3.3?
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* [Bug optimization/10221] gcc -O9 will introduce wrong asembler?
[not found] <20030326124600.10221.eoo@chess.nl>
` (4 preceding siblings ...)
2003-07-05 19:40 ` dhazeghi at yahoo dot com
@ 2003-07-09 12:45 ` erik dot oosterom at chess dot nl
2003-07-09 14:23 ` bangerth at dealii dot org
6 siblings, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: erik dot oosterom at chess dot nl @ 2003-07-09 12:45 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
PLEASE REPLY TO gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org ONLY, *NOT* gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10221
------- Additional Comments From erik dot oosterom at chess dot nl 2003-07-09 12:45 -------
Subject: Re: gcc -O9 will introduce wrong asembler?
I'am very sorry, i can't work futer on this project.
:(
Erik
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* [Bug optimization/10221] gcc -O9 will introduce wrong asembler?
[not found] <20030326124600.10221.eoo@chess.nl>
` (5 preceding siblings ...)
2003-07-09 12:45 ` erik dot oosterom at chess dot nl
@ 2003-07-09 14:23 ` bangerth at dealii dot org
6 siblings, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: bangerth at dealii dot org @ 2003-07-09 14:23 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
PLEASE REPLY TO gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org ONLY, *NOT* gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10221
bangerth at dealii dot org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution| |FIXED
------- Additional Comments From bangerth at dealii dot org 2003-07-09 14:23 -------
Bug seems to be fixed, and no feedback forthcoming otherwise.
W.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2003-07-09 14:23 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
[not found] <20030326124600.10221.eoo@chess.nl>
2003-06-02 1:03 ` [Bug optimization/10221] gcc -O9 will introduce wrong asembler? dhazeghi@yahoo.com
2003-06-02 9:04 ` erik.oosterom@chess.nl
2003-06-24 14:37 ` erik dot oosterom at chess dot nl
2003-07-02 13:21 ` erik dot oosterom at chess dot nl
2003-07-05 19:40 ` dhazeghi at yahoo dot com
2003-07-09 12:45 ` erik dot oosterom at chess dot nl
2003-07-09 14:23 ` bangerth at dealii dot org
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).